Tracy v. Commissioner

1973 T.C. Memo. 28, 32 T.C.M. 102, 1973 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 259
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedFebruary 6, 1973
DocketDocket No. 2773-71.
StatusUnpublished

This text of 1973 T.C. Memo. 28 (Tracy v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Tracy v. Commissioner, 1973 T.C. Memo. 28, 32 T.C.M. 102, 1973 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 259 (tax 1973).

Opinion

JAMES T. TRACY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Tracy v. Commissioner
Docket No. 2773-71.
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 1973-28; 1973 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 259; 32 T.C.M. (CCH) 102; T.C.M. (RIA) 730028;
February 6, 1973, Filed
James T. Tracy, pro se.
Howard L. Williams, for the respondent.

DAWSON

MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION

DAWSON, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency of $380.57 in petitioner's Federal income tax for the year 1967. This was based on the ground that petitioner's wife, Patricia M. Tracy, was a nonresident alien of the United States in 1967 and, therefore, the 2 petitioner was not entitled to file a joint Federal income tax return with his wife for that year.

In his original and amended petitions filed in this proceeding, the petitioner claimed an overpayment of $1,022, alleging that in 1967 he was a legal resident of California, a community property State, while working in Germany as a civilian engineer for the United States Army; that the United States Government nullified the intent of his*260 wife to return to the United States by declaring her a nonresident alien; and that, consequently, he is liable for Federal income taxes on only one-half of their community income.

In his answer to the amended petition, the respondent admitted that he erred in determining the 1967 income tax deficiency of $380.57 because the petitioner's wife was a resident alien during the taxable year 1967; and respondent alleged that the petitioner is not entitled to the claimed overpayment for that year.

We must decide whether Patricia M. Tracy was a resident or non-resident alien of the United States during the taxable year 1967.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Some of the facts have been stipulated by the parties and are found accordingly.

James T. Tracy (herein called petitioner) resided in Springfield, Virginia, when he filed his petition and amended petition in this 3 proceeding. Petitioner is married to Patricia M. Tracy and they presently live together as husband and wife at 7715 Harwood Place, Springfield, Virginia. They timely filed a joint Federal income tax return for the year 1967 with the Office of International Operations of the Internal Revenue Service.

Petitioner, his wife*261 and one child entered the United States from Canada as immigrants on May 22, 1956. They were admitted as permanent resident aliens, and resided in the United States until 1965. From 1960 until December 1965 the petitioner and his family lived in California, a community property State.

Petitioner became a naturalized citizen of the United States on December 19, 1961. Patricia M. Tracy could not qualify as a naturalized citizen because of various visits she made to Canada.

In 1965 the petitioner accepted a job (under a three-year contract) as a civilian electronic engineer with the United States Army and was to be stationed to Germany. In November 1965 he left his home in California and traveled to Germany. His wife and four children left the United States on December 15, 1965, to join him there.

Petitioner signed a transportation agreement on June 27, 1966, which provided, in part, as follows:

It is agreed and understood that the following conditions prevail in connection with my eligibility for transportation at Government expense to the post of 4 employment outside the continental limits of the United States and return to place of actual residence at time of such*262 employment.

a. I agree that I will remain in the employ of the Department of the Army in the area in which I am assigned or reassigned for at least 29 months beginning with the date of arrival at my permanent duty station.

b. I agree that if I voluntarily separate from my employment with the Department of the Army prior to completion of 12 months of service, or if I am involuntarily separated for misconduct prior to completion of 12 months of service, I will reimburse the Government for all expenses incident to my travel and transportation including that of my dependents, household goods and personal effects, if applicable, to the overseas post of duty unless reasons for voluntary separation are acceptable to the employing command.

c. I fully understand that I will not be eligible for return transportation at Government expense to my place of actual residence at time of my appointment until I have remained the full period specified in a. above and that I will be responsible for my own transportation and that of my dependents, household goods and personal effects, if applicable, if I separate voluntarily or if I am separated involuntarily because of misconduct prior to completion*263 of such period of employment unless reasons for voluntary separation are acceptable to the employing command.

Petitioner's wife applied for and received a re-entry permit for a resident alien before leaving the United States for Germany. The re-entry permit expired on December 2, 1966, and she did not apply for an extension.

Sometime in the fall of 1967 the petitioner requested that he be permitted to terminate his employment agreement with the Army as 5 of December 31, 1967, and asked that he and his family be returned to Anaheim, California. He did not wish to register in the Army career program and was therefore denied a promotion. His request was turned down and he was informed that the civilian personnel office was not authorized to renegotiate the transportation agreement.

Petitioner, his wife and children continued to live in Germany until their departure for the United States in November 1968. And during this time the petitioner worked as an engineer for the United States Army.

In July 1968 the petitioner, knowing that he would be returning to the United States in November, began taking steps to obtain the required re-entry papers for his wife and son. Contracts*264 were made with the USAREUR Headquarters in Heidelberg, the Civilian Personnel Office there, and the United States Consulate in Frankfurt. He visited the Consulate in Frankfurt about twice a week from August to October, but his efforts were unsuccessful. Mrs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Friedman v. Commissioner
37 T.C. 539 (U.S. Tax Court, 1961)
Baer v. Commissioner
6 T.C. 1195 (U.S. Tax Court, 1946)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1973 T.C. Memo. 28, 32 T.C.M. 102, 1973 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tracy-v-commissioner-tax-1973.